The Troubling Rise of Scurvy: A Review and National Analysis of Incidence, Associated Risk Factors, and Clinical Manifestations.

INTRODUCTION: In the era of modern medicine, scurvy has been thought of as a rare disease of ancient times because of improved emphasis on diet and nutrition; however, isolated case reports are plentiful. This investigation presents a comprehensive review of scurvy, including an analysis on its rising incidence, with specific focus on its orthopaedic manifestations and commonly associated diagnoses. METHODS: This comprehensive review includes a retrospective analysis of 19,413,465 pediatric patients in the National Inpatient Sample database from 2016 through 2020. Patients with scurvy were identified by the ICD-10 code, and an estimated incidence of scurvy in the inpatient pediatric population was calculated. Concurrent diagnoses, musculoskeletal reports, and demographic variables were collected from patient records. Comparisons were made using analysis of variance or chi-square with Kendall tau, where appropriate. RESULTS: The incidence of scurvy increased over the study period, from 8.2 per 100,000 in 2016 to 26.7 per 100,000 in 2020. Patients with scurvy were more likely to be younger (P < 0.001), male (P = 0.010), in the lowest income quartile (P = 0.013), and obese (P < 0.001). A majority (64.2%) had a concomitant diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. Common presenting musculoskeletal reports included difficulty walking, knee pain, and lower limb deformity. Burden of disease of scurvy was markedly greater than that of the average inpatient population, with these patients experiencing greater total charges and longer hospital stays. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should be aware of the increasing incidence of scurvy in modern medicine. In cases of vague musculoskeletal reports without clear etiology, a diagnosis of scurvy should be considered, particularly if risk factors are present. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NA.

The Circle-Fit Method Helps Make Reliable Cortical Thickness Measurements Regardless of Humeral Length.

BACKGROUND: Although proximal humerus strength/quality can be assessed using cortical thickness measurements (eg, cortical index), there is no agreement where to make them. Tingart and coworkers used measurements where the proximal endosteum becomes parallel, while Mather and coworkers used measurements where the periosteum becomes parallel. The new circle-fit method (CFM) makes 2 metaphyseal (M1-M2) and 6 diaphyseal (D1-D6) measurements referenced from humeral head diameter (HHD). However, it is unknown whether these locations correlate to humeral length (HL). Accordingly, we asked: (1) Does HHD, Tingart distance, and Mather distance correlate with HL? (2) What is the location of HHD, Tingart distance, and Mather distance as a percentage of HL? and (3) Which CFM D1-D6 locations correlate with Tingart and Mather distances? MATERIALS AND METHODS: Measurements made on cortical thickness (CT) scout views of 19 humeri (ages: 16-73 years) included HHD, distances from the superior aspect of the humerus to proximal Tingart and Mather locations, and HL. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation was excellent for CFM-HHD, poor for Tingart, and moderate for Mather. The CFM-HHD had a stronger correlation to HL than Tingart and Mather. Mean HHD was 15.5% (0.9%) of HL while Tingart was 27.0% (4.1%) and Mather was 23.2% (3.8%). Tingart distance corresponded to D2/D3 CFM locations while the Mather distance was similar to D1/D2. DISCUSSION: The CFM reliably correlates with HL and provides a stronger correlation and less variance between specimens than the Tingart or Mather Methods. CONCLUSIONS: Because the CFM produces reliable percent of HL locations, it should be used to define locations for obtaining biomechanically relevant CT measurements such as cortical index. Stronger correlations of these CFM-based measurements with proximal humerus strength will be important for developing advanced algorithms for fracture treatment.